Cummings v. State

• Decision Date: 19 March 2001
• Docket Number: No. S00A1490.,S00A1490.
• Parties: CUMMINGS v. The STATE.
• Court: Georgia Supreme Court

544 S.E.2d 429

273 Ga. 547

CUMMINGS v. The STATE.

No. S00A1490.

Supreme Court of Georgia.

March 19, 2001.

J. Pete Theodocion, Augusta, for appellant.

Daniel J. Craig, Dist. Atty., Charles R. Sheppard, Asst. Dist. Atty., Thurbert E. Baker, Atty. Gen., Paula K. Smith, Senior Asst. Atty. Gen., Adam M. Hames, Asst. Atty., Gen., for appellee.

HINES, Justice.

A jury found Reginald M. Cummings guilty of malice murder, felony murder in the commission of aggravated assault, and possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime, in connection with the killing of Alfonzo Williams. He appeals his convictions and we affirm.¹ Viewed to support the verdicts, the evidence showed that on the night Williams was killed, Cummings was in the company of Brown, Vaughns, Gantt, and others. They got into two cars; Brown drove one, Cummings sat in the front seat, and Gantt in the rear seat. The two cars eventually arrived outside Williams's home. Brown knocked on the door and Williams emerged, went to the first of the cars, and spoke with Cummings. After a few minutes, the conversation ended and Williams went back inside. The cars started to depart, but after traveling only a few feet to a stop sign, Brown and Cummings discussed that Williams "knew too much." Brown then put the car into reverse, blew the horn, and gave a pistol to Gantt, stating that if Gantt did not shoot Williams, Brown would kill Gantt. Williams emerged and Gantt fired several times; from the other car, Vaughns also fired at least once. Williams was fatally struck by at least four bullets but was able to re-enter his home, where he stated: "I can't believe Reggie shot me." He told responding officers that Brown and Cummings were in the front seat of the first car and that the shots had come from the person seated in the rear.

Prior to the shooting, Gantt asked Cummings if the pistol was ready to fire, Cummings examined it, stated that it was, and handed it back to Gantt. Also before the shooting, Cummings and Vaughns stated that Williams told the police about their involvement in the earlier murder of Burris. At the time of that shooting, Williams was heard to say that he "had nothing to do with that." Burris was killed approximately three weeks before Williams was killed, and the police were still investigating the Burris killing at the time. After the Williams shooting, Cummings and Vaughns stated that there was one less "snitch" to worry about.

1. The evidence authorized the jury to conclude that Cummings was guilty of the crimes of which he was convicted. Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 99 S.Ct. 2781, 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979). See OCGA §§ 16-2-20 & 16-2-21; Johnson v. State, 269 Ga. 632, 634, 501 S.E.2d 815 (1998).

2. The State introduced evidence of Cummings's involvement in Burris's murder, for which Cummings was convicted of aggravated assault. Cummings contends the evidence improperly commented upon his character and was introduced without compliance with Uniform Superior Court Rule ("USCR") 31.3. However, there was evidence that Williams was killed to prevent him from telling the police what he knew about the Burris murder, or in retaliation for having done so, and the evidence of Cummings's involvement in the killing of Burris was not admitted as a similar transaction but as evidence of Cummings's motive to kill Williams. Evidence as to motive is relevant, even though it may incidentally place the defendant's character in issue. Brady v. State, 270 Ga. 574, 578(5)(a), 513 S.E.2d 199 (1999). As the evidence complained of was evidence of Cummings's motive, notice and a hearing under USCR 31.1 and 31.3 were not necessary. See Fargason v. State, 266 Ga. 463, 465(3), 467 S.E.2d 551 (1996); Hull v. State, 265 Ga. 757(5), 462 S.E.2d 596 (1995), overruled on other grounds, Woods v. State, 269 Ga....